IDAHOBIT communication with questionable examples of non acceptable behaviour

[Chilver]

I work for a national company and received a communication raising awareness for International Day Against Homophobia, Transphobia and Biphobia (IDAHOBIT) which includes 'examples' that are not acceptable in any way. One of these examples states:
• Refusing a trans person access to services or facilities appropriate to their gender identity (e.g. not letting a trans woman use a woman’s bathroom).

Am I wrong in thinking that it is still the law that services and facilities are sex segregated, not gender segregated?

(There is another 'example' that says:
• Thinking a trans woman/man is not a ‘real’ woman/man.
So now our thinking is being dictated too?)

Am I wrong thinking that sex based facilities are still the law? If so, how do I address this? I would have to address it to my direct line manager who definitely has drunk the cool aid with no critical thought (in my opinion) so it wouldn't be an easy conversation. Or do I just let it lie in case it jeopardises my career??

There are no laws in any part of the UK about entry to public lavatories by either sex or gender.

It's all down to social norms and what the facility owner chooses

This newly published report addresses the misinterpretation of the law including around toilets (and how it might be sex discrimination) www.essex.ac.uk/blog/posts/2021/05/17/review-of-two-events-with-external-speakers?fbclid=IwAR0lyPkhu6-HWtsCFqyleHj4KVu5wHH006xhg8zwm0rdsaX_JudcO-8NVWc

@Farahilda

There are no laws in any part of the UK about entry to public lavatories by either sex or gender.

It's all down to social norms and what the facility owner chooses

Not entirely accurate Farahilda, it is an area that is currently being contested, however, the EHRC states that when sex is referred to in relevant laws it is deemed as referring to biological sex, therefore a single sex space is would use the definition of biological sex.

From the document that Goannaforanna linked:

The Equality Act contains exceptions and stating that single sex facilities may be used by whoever chooses to use them in accordance with their gender identity (gender identity is NOT a protected characteristic in the EQA regardless of what Stonewall would have you believe) rather than their sex, it is a potential breach of health and safety legislation, which requires employers to provide toilets and changing rooms either on a single-sex basis or in individual lockable rooms.

No, they can't control what you think either, nor can your freedom of belief, speech or expression be curtailed. The thinking example is just pure totalitarian mind programming and they can fuck off with it.

@RedDogsBeg... 'The thinking example is just pure totalitarian mind programming and they can fuck off with it.'
Yes . Yes indeed .

And what about lesbians? The day seems to miss them out entirely.

Is that because they know what a woman is?

@Cismyfatarse

And what about lesbians? The day seems to miss them out entirely.

Is that because they know what a woman is?

Lesbians you say? No, no, no, that would never do can't have women knowing what women are, for shame.

In all seriousness, TRA's have bullied lesbians out of everything, it's absolutely hideous what has been done to them and the very organisation that should have their back and be fighting for them has thrown them to the wolves and is clapping and cheering as they are torn apart.

It is beyond reprehensible.

Thanks all. Yes, the H&S legislation is good to reference as we are big on that in my workplace.

I have now (briefly) read this afternoon that Robert Jenrick, after a technical review of gender neutral facilities, is going to move to re-(in)state that public building, including offices and local authorities must have sex segregated toilets, so it seems the government is moving to make it law, or at least enshrined in Building Regs?

The more I reflect on it, the more I am annoyed about the thinking comment - all the other examples were around what I personally consider common courtesy and mutual respect for other people, but this one and the toilets example aren't considering courtesy for all (i.e. women!)!